Controversy as South African Christian College is found guilty of anti-gay discrimination.

On the 9 April 2013 the South African Human Rights Commission (sahrc) ruled that the Creare Training Center in Bloemfontein would have to change its prospectus and undergo sensitivity training aided by a local University within 6 months.

Creare advertises itself as a Christian creative arts college (seemingly based on US-styled "Christian right-wing" evangelism), with various full-time or part-time courses.

Although the full prospectus seems to have disappeared for now, it basically seems to have stated that gays and lesbians would not be able to attend classes, unless they sought ex-gay conversion treatment from the center.

As a public service institution (a college) it was felt by some human rights activists that any kind of racial or sexual segregation was unacceptable.

Clearly this has caused some consternation about "gay activists" interfering in Christianity in some circles.
I'm pretty sure however that if any college had a prospectus that forbade heterosexual Christians to have relationships, and only accepted them if they became "ex-Christians" the world would have been up in arms.

I personally wouldn't have given a stuff.
If you want to spend your money on a cult and join a cult then do it by all means, and by their standards.

Well, they haven't been closed, and I doubt they'll have a flood of gays applying in any case (although I have my suspicions about the "Christian arts" and who really does Benny Hinn's make-up).

The director said that they don't discriminate against gays and lesbian students, but they must be willing to change.

Ex-gay ministries are not illegal in SA, but it is illegal to bar people on the grounds of sexual orientation. It would not be illegal to advertise a choice of some ex-gay therapy, no matter how debunked and unproven it may be. However, it would be illegal to dismiss students or staff from an educational institution if they don't undergo such therapy.

Since the Constitution protects both religions and same-sex orientation, it is also not illegal for religious groups to set certain standards barring some sexual practices. In the Dutch Reformed Church, for example, nobody in a same-sex relationship may practice as a priest. However, these rules don't apply to congregants or employees, like organists. If this group labelled itself as a "church" it would probably have gotten away with it.

Thoughts are welcome.

www.mambaonline.com...

gatewaynews.co.za...

www.crearedream.com...

reply to post by halfoldman

Simple-do not spend your time and especially money at any college/university/training school etc etc that interferes in your personal life in any way.

reply to post by halfoldman

Ex-gay ministries are not illegal in SA, but it is illegal to bar people on the grounds of sexual orientation.

There you have it, I suppose.

Oddly enough, in the US, a policy of such discrimination would be perfectly legal, as sexual orientation is NOT covered under the statutes for discrimination.

I suppose in SA, with our long history of enforced apartheid and segregation, this is the last frontier.

After 1994 a lot of cultural institutions (including church groups, or more conservative church sects) tried to retain a "whites only" stance by freedom of association tracts in the Constitution.

They soon discovered however that this was not allowed.

Private land, private clubs and so forth were no excuse to discriminate against anyone on the basis of race, sexual orientation or gender.

Some die-hard owners of camping grounds still tried it until quite recently, when they tried to bar the odd black person entry.

There was some outrage however about blacks-only associations (the black lawyers or black journalists associations, for example), and a long debate about whether black associations are justified, when white associations are not allowed.

Then I recall arguments about one or two gender segregated clubs (a male-only leather bar, and a female-only lesbian club) and accommodation in the gay community.
This was also ruled as allowed, although I cannot recall the justification.

Well, I cannot imagine any group that's so stupid that it will still make an error like this today.
Although laws have not destroyed homophobia or racism, I think everyone should know that you cannot discriminate on the grounds of sexual orientation.

There's ways around this - I'm sure ISKCON or Islamic groups haven't changed their homophobic teachings.
Birds of a feather can flock together and make outsiders feel most unwelcome in all kinds of ways.

So I think this college was trying to be activist and difficult.

I wonder what kind of "sensitivity training" they could possibly give them?

I'd suppose it would be a joke to them.